Author: Gerd Isenberg
Date: 03:30:41 10/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 29, 2003 at 04:41:14, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 29, 2003 at 02:18:13, Gerd Isenberg wrote: > >>On October 28, 2003 at 18:24:55, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On October 27, 2003 at 14:24:06, Jeroen Noomen wrote: >>> >>>Yes i know why you leave temporarily. >>> >>>I would want to know just one thing. >>> >>>Whose decision was it to give Rebel + Tiger, 2 engines with a different style, >>>near to the identical superior tournament book yours, and sjeng some weako >>>thing? >>> >>>Best regards, >>>Vincent >>> >> >>Vincent, >> >>you came up with this nonsense after Jeroen's schadenfreude about you >>(Vincent was relative quiete during the game...). Jeroen already explained >>Sjeng's 1.d4 - Sjeng won a lot of games with it against strong opponents. I see >>the potential problem, if one bookauthor is in charge for two or more programs >>during a tournament - specially if they play each other in a decisive situation. >>But to assume in public here that Jeroen weakens Deep Sjeng explicitly during >>the dutch open is a big affront against Jeroen from your side. >> >>To ask such canting questions as you do, has only the destructive purpose, to >>force distrust between Gian Carlo and Jeroen and probably to draw the attention >>to another subject than Diep's performance in Leiden. >> >>Why didn't Diep play 1.e4 against such weak amateurs as IsiChess? >>I guess you will hide some critical lines for Graz. >>The same may true for Deep Sjeng. >> >>Gerd > >I do not think that Isichess is a weak amateur. >Based on results it is the best amateur in the tournament. > >Uri Thanks Uri, i mean weak in a rhetorical way or in the sense that IsiChess has an outdated book with some randomness, e.g. playing 1.e4/d4 or playing queens gambit with black versus nimzo- or queens-indian etc. Gerd
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.